I think you'll generally find them to be pseudo-intellectuals - people who have read hundreds of not-terribly-challenging books written in English on their favorite themes.
Most self-described palaeoconservatives have read Nock's Our Enemy The State, which is little more than a pamphlet, but few have read Hegel's Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts.
For example: "Breaking All the Rules," a huge web site belonging to one James Hall, who writes under the name "Sartre." This worthy mixes traditional palaeo-Catholicism with existentialist philosophy (I kid you not!) and of course supports Cindy Sheehan.
Sounds incredibly tedious. I wonder how Catholic Mr. Hall actually is, in his beliefs and practice. A man far more intelligent than Hall attempted such a synthesis and in Le Paysan de Garonne he pretty much admitted he failed.
I'm going to guess Hall has never cracked Existence et le existent.
Isn't it amazing that these "palaeos," whose ancestors rejected "levelling" and believed in hieararchy, are now all promoting "populism?"
They seesaw back and forth. "Nobility and property" becomes "blood and soil" at a moment's notice. As you know, these "conservatives" are generally obsessed with the sociological theories of Sorel, Pareto and Gramsci - if the "rulers" at any given point ostracize them, then they seek refuge in the "natural" nobility of the common man.
Right now they're going nuts because neither the man in the street nor the ruling elite give them much credence.
And isn't it equally amazing that people who are anti-pacifist are so virulently anti-war (at least whenever they suppose that somewhere in the world a Jew might benefit)?
Well, the Jews as an actually kingly people with legitimately sacred soil are always a foil to their pretensions.
But then again, these are the people who invoke "the sovereign individual" and attack "the State" while apologizing for Hitler and Mussolini!
Remember that besides the state and the individual there is the "nation", and that Hitler and Mussolini expanded the State while claiming to serve the "nation", the "blood", etc.
Of course, this makes no sense, but neither do those "anarchists" who support Castro and Chavez!
It's very hard to see how left anarchism is functionally different from the mythical "final stage" of Communism.
You've nailed it! It's the objectivity of the Jewish claims that threatens and offends them, since their root belief is in a multiplicity of mututally independent local "truths" and a rejection of universality in principal. And it is the knowledge of the ultimate triumph of the Jewish G-d that they rail against when they scream about "world Jewish domination."